Are we going to be afraid of our own shadows soon?
How much are people going to give up for the sake of their security? This...has crossed the line.
Hell, why not ban clothes? We can find a reason too, right?
This is a John Stossel "Gimme a break" moment.
2006-08-10 13:51:00 · 24 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I think we have been fighting the wrong 'war'. The war on terror (whatever that means) implies that we are fighting terrorists as our biggest concern.
While I am not dismissing terrorists as a threat or as a terrible occurence (especially to its victims), I don't believe that inflicted 'terror' is the biggest price we pay. The biggest price we pay is the impact on our day to day lives:
on the various changes to what we do that affect our freedoms
on the way that any one thing you say or do suddenly labels you
on the way that we tacitly accept things such as racial profiling
on the way that temporary measures have an uncanny way of seeming to be permanent
on the way we are trained to view 'different' people with suspicion
on the greater intolerance we have for each other
on our willingness to first assume the worst
I think that on this war we are unfortunately losing.
It seems to me that in most of the things that truly matter in the long term....life was better before the 'war on terror' began. Terrorism has been around for millenia. Perhaps the 'war' should be against something other than 'terror'. Maybe the war should be against the causes and instigators of terrorism (both in the superficial and immediate sense i.e firebrand leaders; and in the more subtle and deeper sense i.e. eliminate the factors that build the breeding grounds for terrorists)
After all it is in all our interests if we truly want to be free.
2006-08-10 14:13:35 · answer #1 · answered by aap36rob 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
If a terrorist wants to take a plane down he/she is going to. If explosive are in liquid form was doesn't he/she mix it up put it in a condom tie it off and swallow it. The are not going to do a body search, well not yet. The point is no matter how much "security" we have we are never going to be "safe". I have a Brilliant Idea! How about we make everyone strip, put on a nice robe and have our luggage carried on a separate plane maybe we would be "safe" then.
2006-08-11 00:52:53 · answer #2 · answered by chinacat14 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I don't really see the big deal about banning liquids, if they have a bomb that can look like normal liquids its a good thing. you can still take your shampoo and stuff with you, just in your checked luggage.
Or do you think we should be able to carry on anything we want in our carry on? If so that means guns, chainsaws, and round bombs with big fuses sticking out the top.
oh and no you don't have a right to carry liquid on with you, I saw some one earlier today that said it was a violation of constitutional rights lol
2006-08-10 20:57:59 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I don't think we want to ban clothes. Really, people are so fat and ugly, I would rather they wore clothes thank you very much!
But yes, banning liquids is ridiculous. They charge $5 for a beer - this is outrageous. Before you know it, they will be charging for soft-drinks too.
2006-08-10 21:40:47 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
You seem like a self serving, class A butthead. Did you NOT read or watch the news about how liquid explosives got PAST security? Oh, let me guess: everyone you dislike was going to be on those planes that had the very REAL threat of being blown to smitherines so it doesn't matter if that type of explosive gets on board in a WATER BOTTLE. Sorry, you really irritated me with your reasoning.
2006-08-10 21:00:46 · answer #5 · answered by Decoy Duck 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Considering a liquid explosive (that got through security) could've blown a few UK to US flights out of the sky, no it's not ridiculous.
Are you willing to risk your life on that gimmie a break moment?
2006-08-10 20:55:57 · answer #6 · answered by Mom of One in Wisconsin 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
The camel-jockeys obviously figured a way to combine various liquid components to make an explosive. So it's merely prudent to ban such items.....or....
We can do nothing and spend alot of time fishing bodies out of the Atlantic.
Does it sound ridiculous now?
2006-08-10 21:31:54 · answer #7 · answered by kristycordeaux 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
And those that complain now about a little in convenience will be yelling and shouting that when something horrible does happen that not enough was done. Damn carry-ons account for more injuries on airplanes than necessary anyway. Ban the whole concept.
2006-08-10 20:58:39 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
When you are flying oversea's next my man, then you may feel differently. Would you rather take the chance, or would you prefer to know that some level of safety has been taken?
Do you look both ways before crossing a busy street?
2006-08-10 20:57:57 · answer #9 · answered by swimrun_bike 2 · 4⤊ 0⤋
You are right, they should ban all carry on. Items like baby food or medication should be given to staff and held in some area by the flight personel untill you need it.
We never got real security ever, it is time to.
2006-08-10 20:57:05 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋